AMHA is CLosing Their Books!! As well as a new Height rule change!!

[user 488]

May we presume that the full discussion of this issue will appear in the minutes of the Convention general meetings? I would love to hear with whom this idea originated, and what the argument in favor of it consisted of....

I will save further comment for another time, if ever.

Margo

Good point Margo. Were you ALL in the dark about this? Has there been NO mention of this happening and was this just sprung on the majority of miniature horse owners? I cannot imagine this happening in other breeds without a good majority of the members at least discussing this. Blows my mind.

I guess that would be my biggest question.........How did this happen without all of you knowing about it?

I don't get it........something not right with the whole picture.

And looking at a poll here it is quite obvious that the great majority think these horses should be measured like horses. Want to talk credibility with the rest of the equine World?

 

[Becky]

How did this happen without all of you knowing about it?

All of the By Law and Show Rule Amendments to be voted on at the 2008 Annual Meeting and Convention were published at the very least in the December 2007 Miniature Horse World so all AMHA members had access to the information.

 

[user 488]

Thank you Becky. That sure answers a multitude of questions for me.

 

[Mona]

How did this happen without all of you knowing about it?

All of the By Law and Show Rule Amendments to be voted on at the 2008 Annual Meeting and Convention were published at the very least in the December 2007 Miniature Horse World so all AMHA members had access to the information.

Yes, BUT, (since I no longer have my magazine I cannot look back to it) I am assuming that what would have been printed in the magazine was that they were bringing before the board, the attempt to change the measuring to the top of the wither? BUT, since that was shot down, then how could they have possibly decided on going to the base of the wither, without any prior announcemnt to the general membership? I feel if that one was shot down, THAT is where it should have ended??

 

[bingo]

Not to belabor the point here but there is a serious problem when less then 100 people can vote on things that can and have changed the entire future of the breed. This is happening in both registries and it really is an issue that needs to be not only addressed but dealt with.

 

[Mona]

Not to belabor the point here but there is a serious problem when less then 100 people can vote on things that can and have changed the entire future of the breed. This is happening in both registries and it really is an issue that needs to be not only addressed but dealt with.

EXACTLY!!

 

[Becky]

Mona, both proposals (one to measure to the top of the withers - one to measure at the base of the withers) were published in the MHW. Both were voted upon by the general membership at the meeting.

 

[targetsmom]

And how many AMHA members, reading the two proposals in the MHW, would have considered that the measurement to the top of the withers would have been shot down and the one to the base of the withers would have been the one adopted?

 

[Relic]

Actually my daughter said it would be shot down because she had measured most of the close to 34" ones and half of them would not have measured in some not even under 35" top of withers

 

[Margo_C-T]

I might just point out that a Lifetime AMHA membership does not include the MHW, and I no longer choose to spend that extra money,as a retiree on a limited income. Even though a Lifetime membership is no longer available(it was a money-losing proposition, apparently...), the list, as periodically published in the MHW, of Lifetime members is actually pretty long, so there IS the potential for quite a fair number of members to not be receiving the MHW due to not having paid what is for them, the 'extra', to receive it.

Margo

 

[user 488]

Actually my daughter said it would be shot down because she had measured most of the close to 34" ones and half of them would not have measured in some not even under 35" top of withers

As pointed out before the acceptable height would have to be changed to 35" or 36". So what. Same horse.

And what is the difference as it stands now. The taller horses are now going to measure in anyway.

Mane hairs, divots, RIDICULOUS.

 

[Michelle@wescofarms]

I for one, am glad to see AMHA is taking steps to make Miniature Horses a breed by closing the registry. No, I'm not anti-AMHR or anti-Shetland or anti-SuperDuper backyard find - I am anti - any horse not being DNA/PQ tested and it's pedigree being Unknown!

AMHA is giving plenty of time to get horses hardshipped - heck if you think the mare/stallion you currently own or plan to buy, might produce something you want in AMHA after 2013 - register that horse now! No problems then. As for all the backyard unregisterd gems out there - how many truly are there? Yes, horses can lose paperwork over time and ownership changes and that is sad but it's just that sad. If I bought an unregistered German Shepard do you think AKC or any reputable dog breed registry is going to give .02 for the fact that it 'looks like' a perfect example of a German Shepard? They'd laugh! No paperwork no registration.

Registration papers, DNA/PQ testing, show records, etc., matter to those that seriously show and or breed period! The average owner doesn't care if that Mini's sole purpose is as a pet or a fun time at local shows or occassional driving or CDE competitor, service animal or companion - papers might be nice but they're not that important. If people want to argue that - check the studbooks of either registry if you're a breeder and look how many minis you still own that you've sold over the years - people didn't and don't bother to get paperwork put in their names it's not important to them.

As for the measurment - that makes no sense. Unless AMHA (and AMHR) are going to join the rest of the equine world and measure at the top of the withers whats the point? Last mane hair, a divot in the spine, the middle of the sway back, top of the poll - they're all laughable and totally unnecessary. A withers measurement could be instituted beginning with (for example) six years in the future the measurement will increase to 35 or whatever magic number people agree on - anything permanently registered prior to that is grandfathered in at the current measuring system. That way breeding's can be planned and implemented with FULL knowledge of what is at risk regarding getting horses permanently registered.

Kudos AMHA for taking a small step towards becoming a breed! Hopefully by 2020 we'll have it down and be a breed not a height registry!!!!!

 

[Erica]

I for one, am glad to see AMHA is taking steps to make Miniature Horses a breed by closing the registry. No, I'm not anti-AMHR or anti-Shetland or anti-SuperDuper backyard find - I am anti - any horse not being DNA/PQ tested and it's pedigree being Unknown!

As I think already stated on this post somewhere, without digging through 20 pages........if AMHA is doing this to become a "BREED" then that is fine and dandy.........but then it should be ANY horse out of two AMHA registered parents should have papers, even if they are 38" at maturity (and we know it "can" happen, even with two 32" horses, but especially with two 34/35" horses)

As if we are closing the book to become a breed, but still horses over 34" have to turn in papers aren't we still a "HEIGHT" registry?

 

[CyndiD]

Everyone is entitled to an opinion...mine is that I am GLAD to see the AMHA moving toward making this a BREED...and not a height registry.

Then all this discussion on where and how to measure will be moot.

 

[Mona]

Everyone is entitled to an opinion...mine is that I am GLAD to see the AMHA moving toward making this a BREED...and not a height registry.

Then all this discussion on where and how to measure will be moot.

IF it ever gets to that!

 

[sfmini]

Those of you who do not get the World could have seen the proposed changes on the AMHA website well before the annual meeting.

I was one of the FEW who voted no, it was an overhwelming majority in favor.

As for the minutes, they are not a word for word document, only a summary level so no discussions will appear in any kind of detail if at all.

For the record, I as an AMHA director was NOT contacted by ANYBODY expressing any kind of opinion on the voting issues, or anything else for that matter. If you want to have any kind of a say, and you can't attend the meetings, then by all means contact your directors, and even all directors and let them know how you feel, otherwise we will vote as we see would be the best for the organization.

 

[HGFarm]

I agree.... if AMHA wants to consider itself a 'breed', then they will have to throw the measuring stick away. POA does not yank papers on the horses that go over, as someone previously stated earlier in this discussion. They are breeding stock only, and cannot show.

What a joke- this would be a 'breed'?? By what standards? QH are allowed to have a LOT of Thoroughbred outcrossing. Appies allow other breeds in. QH's have 'cropouts' with Paint coloring- do you all know how the very first QH's were chosen to be registered? Ever see a picture of the QH 'Old Fred' and some others? He was a pinto! I understand Joker B's roan mother was a registered QH until oops, she produced an Appaloosa colt! Where did Thoroughbreds come from?

All these many 'breeds' that profess to be 'purebreds'... ridiculous.

I only see this as a smoke screen to cover up the fact that there are MANY oversized horses out there, still walking around with AMHA papers. According to the AMHA rule book itself "As defined by AMHA, any horse that exceeds 34" in height is NOT a Miniature Horse and is not eligible for registration." Why do these oversized horses still have papers?

If they are going to be grandfathered, they have already broken the registries own rules by allowing them to all keep papers that they should not have to begin with. This is turning a blind eye to the fact that all these horses are knowingly out there with invalid papers, since these are NOT Miniature Horses- so just change the rules to avoid making people be accountable.

This will not stop the cheating and give me a break.... HOW MANY competitors out there are dying the hair or sewing in hair to make more mane to get into a show out of the percentage of people that show?!

It says what I stated in one of my first posts before I read most of this- a few bad apples ruin the whole thing and without some form of punishment, will just keep doing the same old thing and find another way to cheat. It's all about money and winning. And that's behind who changed the rules so all these already oversized horses can keep on showing.

Ridiculous.

 

[R3]

For a little more insight, please read the topic I started. "Personal Insight on New Hardship and Measuring Place"

I was at the meeting and I was on the By-Laws committee. I was the one who proposed the rule change to measure at the heighest point of the withers. I stood up to speak against this 'base of the withers'.

The rule change proposal for the 'base of the withers' was in with all the other rule changes, but honestly, I thought it was 'silly' and totally without merit. I honestly thought that it was put in by someone who didn't understand about horses (I don't know who actually proposed it, so I apologize if I hurt someones feelings). I had absolutely NO idea that the proposal would be seriously considered, let alone pass by such a large margin. Prior to the meeting, I didn't hear any 'talk' about the proposal. I was floored with the way that the vote went.

I hadn't expected the top of the withers to pass, but I at least wanted to start the dialogue to get people thinking about the top of the withers as an option, if not for then, maybe in the future.

For what its worth, I have already been contacted by miniature owners in Europe asking if there is anything they can do to help get this rule changed. They are very concerned about this new measuring method.

Anyway, I will bump my previous post back up so you can see my views.

 

[Mona]

For what its worth, I have already been contacted by miniature owners in Europe asking if there is anything they can do to help get this rule changed. They are very concerned about this new measuring method.

So IS there anything that can be done to get this rule changed??

 

[Devon]

I for one, am glad to see AMHA is taking steps to make Miniature Horses a breed by closing the registry. No, I'm not anti-AMHR or anti-Shetland or anti-SuperDuper backyard find - I am anti - any horse not being DNA/PQ tested and it's pedigree being Unknown!

As I think already stated on this post somewhere, without digging through 20 pages........if AMHA is doing this to become a "BREED" then that is fine and dandy.........but then it should be ANY horse out of two AMHA registered parents should have papers, even if they are 38" at maturity (and we know it "can" happen, even with two 32" horses, but especially with two 34/35" horses)

As if we are closing the book to become a breed, but still horses over 34" have to turn in papers aren't we still a "HEIGHT" registry?

Exactly